A State of EducationSome Views of a Nontraditional Studentby Cathy L.Z. Smithcathylz@netzero.com

Attribute to The Libertarian Enterprise

I find nothing with which to disagree in Greg Lukianoff's analysis of
the state of free speech on today's college and university campuses
(see Greg Lukianoff on campus censorship). Censorship is
a nearly universal trend, one embraced by both sides of the political
spectrum, leaving those on either side who would argue against it
with little recourse and no firm ground upon which to mount their
objections.

It seems with respect to freedom those who find themselves in
positions of power (among others) seem unable or unwilling to grasp
the most fundamental tenet of freedom, namely, that in order to be
free you must allow those around you to be free as well. Any limit
placed on the freedom of one individual becomes a prison not only for
the intended victim but for the proposer of such limitation. As the
sphere of acceptable discourse becomes narrower and narrower, the
likelihood of civil debate diminishes, replaced by other, less
genteel, forms of communication.

An even more insidious example of this desire to eliminate opposing
opinions is found in the recent push by some critics of intellectual
property rights to blur, if not obliterate, the very cultural roots
of historical discourse. Their mantra asserts that there are but a
few stories that can be told, and the circumstances, and political,
philosophical, and cultural values of the storyteller that surround
those stories are irrelevant to the lessons they impart concerning
the human condition.

The origins of creative works are as important as the works
themselves, providing context and accountability. The desire, for
instance, to remove certain "offensive" terms from the works of Mark
Twain condemns us to travel those same paths again, ignorant of the
wisdom that has preceded us in our social evolution. Likewise the
recent Canadian decision to censor the works of Mark Knopfler, on the
ever more shrilly-cited grounds of "hate speech", cramp and shrink
our culture. It is impossible to change opposing attitudes once it's
made impossible to explore and discuss them.

Proponents of literary expropriation oppose the "straightjacket" of
the requirement to attribute sources and refrain from acts of blatant
plagiarism even as they dismiss the notion of a functioning "market"
in the realm of creative endeavor. These individuals assert that an
original work of music, poetry or prose once "released" from the mind
of its creator no longer entitles the creator to any recognition,
financial or historical, excepting that which the expropriators
volunteer to contribute, while they themselves, by virtue of their
possession of a copy of the work, now possess the right to call it
their own and distribute it without regard for the wishes of its
rightful owner.

The most ominous aspect of this movement, however, is that to deny
one credit for one's works is also to remove responsibility. If we
are responsible for nothing that we say, for good or for ill, how do
we steer a moral course through our lives and our interactions with
our fellows?